29 September 2012

I allow that we conservatives perceive their desires as being in spite of the facts because I firmly believe, and indeed now know that this isn’t the case at all: They know their system will result in disaster. They know their economic practices are lies intended to destroy the country. They know that their view of criminal justice merely lets criminals off the hook, while making their victims doubly accosted. They know all of this. I speak not of the useful idiots, who don’t know much of anything except that they want their “Obama-phones” or “Cash for Clunkers” or “EBT cards,” or their truckload of free contraceptives, or whatever they’re after on any particular occasion. Instead, I am talking of the cloistered, ivory-tower intellectuals of the left, who fancy themselves geniuses of social organization, but who without the forcing hand of government could not assemble an afternoon tea for lack of practical knowledge and experience. These are the people who sit about thinking over the problems of what to do with millions of intractable, un-rehabilitated conservatives and capitalists once the statists finally attain their end-to-end control. Their answer is the same for this problem as for any other: Death. Kill them.

RTWT. This is the horror we find ourselves facing, backed by a horde of mindless, spoiled children in adult bodies. This--submission or death--is what they have in mind for us.

28 September 2012

Given the insanity of the past two weeks, replete with the White House nudging Google to pull the video off of YouTube and the State Department running ads on Pakistani TV to apologize for a movie they had nothing to do with, I can’t quite believe the DOJ would risk the perception that they’re punishing this guy for a thoughtcrime unless something serious was involved. There has to be a real crime underlying this. Right?

Man, you gotta be kidding. Why would the wholly-corrupt Ministry of Justice care what anybody thinks about their lawless actions? Who’s gonna stop ‘em? What’s anybody gonna do about it? What’s happened to them in response to the other examples of their flagrant and obvious disregard for the rule of law under Obama the Great (Fast and Furious, NBP voter intimidation, refusal to enforce immigration law, et al)? What does this or any other out-of-control federal agency have to fear from a nation of benumbed and benighted ignoramuses, so deep in denial about the reality of their rogue government that they still can’t bestir themselves to even the slightest real concern over the direction in which we’re moving? What are we gonna do, baaaaa at ‘em with more vigor and tremolo?

Likely not until they're in a concentration campdetention facility reeducation environment. Too late then.

I honestly don't know how to get the concept of thug mentality across to civilized people. It's one of those things that are 'lost in translation.' Let me quote the most relevant parts of Cold Fury's screed again:

Why would the wholly-corrupt Ministry of Justice care what anybody thinks about their lawless actions? Who’s gonna stop ‘em?What’s anybody gonna do about it?

That's the mentality. I've said it repeatedly, and I'll say it again: The rule of law is completely irrelevant to those running our country. The rules of civilization are completely irrelevant to those running our country. This pathetic reliance upon standards of decency, morality or legality brings to mind the old Robin Williams routine concerning unarmed cops in the UK: "STOP! Or I'll say 'stop' AGAIN!"

We're being ruled by thugs. A thug does what he wants, when he wants, and what do you think you're gonna do about it, bitch? A thug is only deterred by the credible threat or use of overwhelming force at the scene and moment of the crime. Nothing else works. The threat of eventual consequences is nothing to a person who can't see past the next couple of minutes.

If you're expecting this regime to abide by any sort of civilized behavior, or to 'play by the rules,' you are certifiably insane. And I mean that in the most literal sense.

...I'm still alive. I've just been too fried to post a lot, since I just worked 56 hours this week. I know it doesn't sound like much to some, but bear in mind I have a 90-mile commute on each end of the day. When you leave for work at 0300 and get back at 2230, you're pretty much out of time to post anything--at least anything coherent.

And for this, I am truly grateful.

I thank God every day for the job I have. I thank Him for the opportunity to earn a good living through honest work. I thank Him for the great people I work with, for the wonderful folks I meet during the course of my day, for the spellbinding scenery that I get to drive through and appreciate. I thank Him, also, for the unpleasant people I encounter, as they help me develop my capacity for patience and understanding, which helps me be a better person and a better Christian.

I used to be one of those people who bitched about their job and their life, and only saw the downside of those things. Now, when someone asks, "How's it going?" I respond, "Another day in Paradise!"

Preface: An entertaining bedtime story providing some fundamental lessons of life for your children, such as work ethic, honesty, responsibility, and simple business principles. Ages recommended: 6-10.

Once upon a time there was a fine young boy named Andy Workman who lived with his parents in Freedomville, a small town with a school, a library, a fire station, a police department, and many stores. In Freedomville, everyone was given an equal chance to work and live as they wanted to.

Andy was proud of his school. His teachers thought he was special as he learned his lessons quickly, studied at night, and always completed his homework on time. He also loved to read and went to the library regularly or visited the local book store. He was fond of books about adventure, travel to foreign lands, and humor. His favorite books though were about mechanics and how to build or fix things.

If you have little ones, I strongly recommend starting them early--they'll be facing a lot of indoctrination in today's world, and a strong foundation never hurts.

21 September 2012

These remarks show the very heart of this Administration. They display the
hostility toward Christianity and the sympathy for the Islamic cause. I'm not
sure how one who is a Christian can justify a vote for Barack Obama. I don't
know how, having revealed his sympathy and support for Islam, a homosexual might
vote for Barack Obama, unless it is with a blindfold and ear plugs. It has been
proven time and time again that Islamic nations oppress and murder homosexuals,
often subjecting them to mutilation and torture. I don't know how women, knowing
the support Barack Obama has shown for Islam, a religion that denigrates women,
that murders them for infidelity, that murders them for the clothes they wear
and the things they say can support Barack Obama.

How is that possible?
What sort of delusional mind-frame allows such duplicity?

The President
of the United States and the Secretary of State are supposed to represent the
interests of the United States, to stand up for its values, to support the views
of its people. This shameful pandering to a violent religion over the freedom of
speech of one of it's citizens is shameful. They have done nothing less than
step in front of the mob and direct its actions against anyone who might oppose
the violent suppression of free speech. They have done nothing but put
themselves on the side of the Islamic hate-mobs against the very principles of
American society.

17 September 2012

...you should read this. (All you goons at the TSA and other fedgov agencies, go find someone with a brain to read it to you.)

I heard it many times. Maybe you have also. "I'm not here to get killed. I'm going home at the end of my shift." I heard it so much and went off so many times on the utterer that those so inclined learned not to say such nonsense in my hearing. Because it is just that. Nonsense. Here's the bottom line if you're a cop and may Robert A. Heinlein forgive me for ripping him off so shamelessly.

If the situation calls for him to do so, it is absolutely a police officer's job to die in the line of duty. Blanket statement.

That's not an easy thing to write or say for a man who devoted so much of his life, sweat and blood to his chosen profession but that doesn't make it any less true. If the situation calls for you to spend your life in the performance of your duties then spend it you must or go find something else to do. A cop who is so afraid of death as to shoot wildly in a crowd is morally bankrupt and has no place in the pantheon of heroes who have gone before him. Simple as that. A police officer owes it to the citizens we're sworn to protect and defend and to the very profession that nurtures us and pays us and gives our life noble purpose. Every one else walking and driving and just standing around also wants to go home at the end of your shift and it's your job to ensure that they do so to the limit of your ability. It is not our job to kill people and break things. Sometimes we must do so but it's always the exception and not the rule. If we have to kill we have failed in our primary duty to preserve life.

This is from "Six," who "...spent 9 years as a soldier and 24 as a street cop. In both I was a firearms instructor and Field Training Officer (FTO) so I do know a little about this subject." A scathing dissertation on cops and cowardice, and how the mix can only end badly.

I'm still wondering about that harmless airplaneforeign missile launch off the California coast almost two years ago. So are a lot of people:

And let me just get this out of the way right now; the simple and most obvious fact about this whole event is that the KCBS video records, of course, an actual missile flight. It cannot be an aircraft contrail, not unless that aircraft has a lit solid rocket motor strapped to it. As one engineer said about the video, “If anyone looks at that video and says it’s an airplane, they are either lying or stupid.” I could not state it any better myself, and I say that as a working aerospace engineer who’s career has been spent mostly on ICBMs, ICBM-derived launch vehicles and missile defense programs. If someone can eventually prove to me that this contrail is really from an airplane, then I will gladly buy them a house and a lifetime supply of beer. It’s that obvious, and I’ll attempt to make it more obvious to you in the remainder of this post.

This is one you need to read all the way through. And if you haven't heard of this before, ask yourself why not.

We can also have a fair political debate as to whether we should have foreign missions at all, and if so, where. That's fair game and a debate we damn well ought to have. We should couple it with our idiotic failure of an energy policy that has left us with the obligation to defend foreign energy access lest our economy instantly collapse. But that debate is difficult as the simple (and wrong) prognostications of many, including Johnson and (sadly) Ron Paul, disconnected from the energy situation, is untenable and thus either belies an unserious appeal to wingbats on one fringe of the party or another, or worse, a vapid lack of understanding of how we got where we are today. The latter, if true, is especially dangerous for someone who aspires to be Commander In-Chief.

But this latest series of actions by clearly-coordinated groups of militants leave no room for discussion or debate. Embassy land is sovereign US territory just as is, for example, the Egyptian Embassy in our nation is sovereign Egyptian territory. Both are established under bilateral agreement and long-standing International Law. A nation can expel another's ambassadors and revoke that agreement but until it does so via diplomatic channels the land on which that Embassy sits is not theirs, it's ours.

No nation exists if it will not defend its soil.

I wonder if anyone in the LP realizes just how many more people would be in their corner except for their stupidity concerning foreign policy?

I'm all for individual liberty, and--in theory--anarchy would be a great thing. You know, I don't tell you what to do, you don't tell me what to do. I respect your property and liberty and you respect mine. If we want to get something done through cooperative effort, participation is strictly voluntary, not forced by some goverment agency. Great idea, right?

But this could only work if every single person were committed to those principles. They're not. Not even all Americans agree with this, let alone the rest of the world. There are people, cultures and nations that want power over others, and these are what we must defend ourselves and our civilized allies against. If we do not defend America--the only nation founded upon the principle of individual liberty--then freedom dies. If we do not defend our culture, our country and our Constitution, and back up those who support these things, Earth will fall to abject tyranny faster than anyone dreamed possible.

That's where too many of my fellow Libertarians are wrong. They fail to see that not all countries and cultures are equal. Those who support us, need our support in turn, and those who are actively hostile to liberty must be met with determination and strength.

Come on, Ronulans...just do that final bit of growing up, for all our sakes.

But in the meantime, until our CTL and thorium infrastructure is online, if one more American dies or is mistreated, if one more square millimeter of our property is damaged or destroyed, or if one more armed military action is taken against our people or property you will be hunted down like dogs and the pieces of what remain when our military is done with you will be fed to feral pigs. And should you decide that due to this change in policy you intend to go out in a "blaze of glory" let me warn you that if a mass-destruction action is taken against our land or people, or against our allies, we will turn Mecca and Medina into high-quality glass. And once we have taken retribution for your acts we will then expropriate what you used to have, dollar-for-dollar, to compensate us for the harm you inflicted upon us.

Oh, one more thing -- we will not implement Sharia Law or anything approximating it. Further, self-declared enemies of our nation are not welcome on our soil; America is a place for freedom-loving people who respect the freedom of religion, including the right to be free from religion if one so chooses. The people of this nation have the absolute right to insult anyone they so choose; while such behavior may be boorish or rude the right to free expression is nonetheless one of our founding principles. Any individual or group that resorts to violence in response to free expression and through doing so brings harm to any American or their property will be deemed to have self-declared themselves as a rabid animal and we will defend our citizens and property from such rabid animals using all necessary force without apology or second thought.

Consider this a formal warning, because it is.

That's what we should have been saying all along. You can't reason with fanatics. You can't expect savages to understand anything but force. You can't trust barbarians to be honorable or civilized.

14 September 2012

FAVOR: Below are both versions. For those of you with the capability and
know-how, PLEASE DOWNLOAD THE VIDEOS, MIRROR AND REPOST - MOST ESPECIALLY THE
ARABIC SUBTITLED VERSION. I obviously have the original version, but I do not
have a copy of the Arabic version on my hard drive.

Of course, there are more than just the two candidates, but voting for someone with no realistic chance to win is tantamount to "wasting your vote", as the conventional thinking goes. But that ignores the reality of the Electoral College (among many, many other things), which renders all but the most competitive states basically meaningless. And a vote can only be "wasted" if it had value to begin with, so to help you determine if casting your vote for The Lesser of Two Evils might make a difference, I put together this handy map:

The thing about voting for someone else, though, is that it isn't about winning; it's about making the major parties afraid. It's about forcing them to truly compete on their merits in an open marketplace, and not just against each other. Would the Democrats so coldly dismiss the notion of reforming drug policy if they were worried about losing votes to the Greens or the Libertarians? Would the Republicans so thoughtlessly call for harsher laws against pornography and gambling and whatever else their authoritarian wing deems morally unacceptable? Would either of them be so indifferent to the massive costs—in every sense of the word—of fighting an endless war?

10 September 2012

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who has called for scrapping
President Barack Obama's 2010 U.S. healthcare law, said in remarks aired on
Sunday that he likes key parts of "Obamacare" despite his party's loathing of it
and wants to retain them.

Romney, who faces Obama in the Nov. 6 election, has vowed throughout the
campaign to repeal and replace the Obama healthcare law. But asked about the
Obama healthcare law on NBC's "Meet the Press" program, Romney said, "Well, I'm
not getting rid of all of healthcare reform."

The little bitch is already waffling, but what do you expect from the architect of ObamaCare Beta? It's not enough that his Master Plan destroyed the economy of Massachussetts--now that the USSC has ruled it legal, he's going to make sure it annihilates the last tattered vestiges of the American Republic as well.

You sometimes meet the most interesting people at the gun range. Recently, I initiated a conversation with a fellow who turned out to be a retired ATF agent. Naturally, I brought up the subject of the foul operation known as Fast and Furious. To my surprise, this fellow stated that an operation such as Fast and Furious is just one part of a 3-part ongoing procedure. Fast and Furious, according to this retired ATF agent, was developed to discredit firearms dealers. If guns purchased in the US “walked” across the southern border and wound up in the hands of drug cartel members, then ATF would have cause to put even more restraints on firearms retailers while at the same time giving the ignorant public a poisoned view of gun shops and gunsmiths.

Second part of ATF’s discrediting procedure is to put an undue strain on manufacturers and importers and in some cases, actually put them out of business. The way they perform this neat little trick is by coming up with rules and regulations that are completely arbitrary.

Third part in the procedure is to “examine” and “test” firearms to make sure they comply with the Gun Control Act of 68, the National Firearms Act and whatever other federal law may apply. This is aimed at the individual gun owner, who is then arrested and prosecuted based on what comes out of the ATF lab.

RTWT. It's not a damn 'mistake.' It's a cold, sociopathically-calculatedplan to disarm the American people, regardless of who suffers and/or dies in the process.

No horror movie could possibly be as chilling as this four-minute clip from Anthony Antonello(HT Wirecutter), which demonstrates the same thought processes that must have been widespread in Germany during the establishment of the Third Reich.

Just get in the cattle car, citizen. Don't worry about the dirt, you'll be able to 'shower' when you get where you're going.

08 September 2012

Iranian Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani, who was originally sentenced to death in his native country for his Christian faith, was acquitted of apostasy charges and released from custody.

Nadarkhani, 32, was imprisoned for three years and waiting execution for refusing to renounce his Christian faith. His charges were lowered to evangelizing to Muslims, which carried a three-year sentence. He was released with time served, according to the American Center for Law and Justice, a Washington-based watchdog group that had been campaigning for the pastor’s release.

“Today our sources in Iran reported that Pastor Youcef was acquitted of apostasy and released from prison. After languishing in prison for almost three years, he has been reunited with his family,” Jordan Sekulow, executive director of ACLJ said in a statement to FoxNews.com.

And God bless all those folks who prayed, wrote, called, protested and refused to let this go.

07 September 2012

The Obama administration is making it easier for bureaucrats to take away guns without offering the accused any realistic due process. In a final rule published last week, the Justice Department granted the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) authority to “seize and administratively forfeit property involved in controlled-substance abuses.” That means government can grab firearms and other property from someone who has never been convicted or even charged with any crime.

It’s a dangerous extension of the civil-forfeiture doctrine, a surreal legal fiction in which the seized property — not a person — is put on trial. This allows prosecutors to dispense with pesky constitutional rights, which conveniently don’t apply to inanimate objects. In this looking-glass world, the owner is effectively guilty until proved innocent and has the burden of proving otherwise. Anyone falsely accused will never see his property again unless he succeeds in an expensive uphill legal battle.

Such seizures are common in drug cases, which sometimes can ensnare people who have done nothing wrong. James Lieto found out about civil forfeiture the hard way when the FBI seized $392,000 from his business because the money was being carried by an armored-car firm he had hired that had fallen under a federal investigation. As the Wall Street Journal reported, Mr. Lieto was never accused of any crime, yet he spent thousands in legal fees to get his money back.

Peter Schiff is our side's James Bond. Here he is at the DNC, drawing out the stupid like a commonsense poultice:

Hey, dumbasses...if corporations don't make profits, why the hell would they exist in the first place? The whole point of a corporation/business is to make profits by providing what the public wants to buy! (As opposed to the government, which makes its money by stealing it from you whether you want them to or not.)

Mr. Schiff has become Recipient # 11 of the W&POAward ForExtreme Cleverness. Well done, sir.

01 September 2012

That’s it. You can shut down the convention right now. It’s over. Romney’s camp just shut down all dissent, and they rigged it that way. Twitter is awash in angry tweets from people who know this was a sham. John Boehner actually wielded the gavel without a hint of a tear as he said “the ayes have it.” They didn’t have it, and I think it was pretty clear that even if they did, this was a set-up. I have news for the GOP establishment. I am voting in November. I will vote for all the down-ballot candidates who are worthy of my support. I am not going to vote for Mitt Romney. Don’t look at the page as though you’ve read the words of a man pledging treason. It was not I who rigged the primaries. It was not I who rigged the convention. It was not I who rigged the rules committee. All of those things are actual treasons against the conservatives in the America, and all of those things were carried out by Mitt Romney and his legion. I am a small matter to it, but I will have my say. If the Republican party wishes to commit suicide by Romney, they may do so, but they will do so without my help in the matter. John Boehner may have enjoyed his moment in despotic pleasure, and Reince Priebus may have been doing his masters’ bidding, but Mitt Romney had it within his power to put a stop to all of this, but when tested by circumstance, Mitt Romney’s fatal character flaws prevailed.

The Republican Party is dead. It’s time we get on with this convention and consider it a funeral. You’re witnessing a party that will now fall, and I’m going to help it on its way. Some of you diehard Republicans who read this blog may wish to find other haunts. It’s not going to be pretty. When I saw John Sununu begin to surface with regularity on Fox News over the last few weeks, I suspected the fix was in. His conduct of the RNC Rules Committee on Tuesday demonstrates that fact.

I am a person who refuses to separate his convictions from his actions and choices. Mitt Romney could have done many things to gain my support, and the support of many others, but rather than do so, he seized control. He used all his pals and buddies to take over and make the voices of grass-roots Republicans and Tea Party conservatives silent. Some will urge that we remain focused on November, and I agree, but my focus is irrevocably changed. I am out to defeat the GOP establishment in any and every form that may take.

What good is a political party that does not serve my long-held convictions, except occasionally and only by accident? I have listened intently to those who have argued these last months that I should give Mitt Romney a chance, but when it came to it, when he should have been willing to give the party a chance, he did not, instead rigging things in his favor for the future. One must then ask the question I had been pondering as Boehner swung the gavel, shedding no tears for the abominable despotism his actions exemplified: If a man seeks an office but creates a set of rules under which it will be more difficult to challenge him in the future, what is his motive?

The only answer is that Mitt Romney wishes to rule without restraints. He does not wish to be confined by a base that will make trouble for him if he fails to live up to the promises he has made. He does not wish to be held to account, or to even have his arm twisted when it comes to such things as appointments or executive orders, or even such bills as he may sign into law. It is understandable that a politician would not wish to be accountable to people who had not supported him, but the truly baffling aspect of this case is that Romney does not wish to be accountable to people whose support he expects to garner in the coming election. Once one considers the explicit meaning of this action, there really is no method by which to resolve it without concluding that Mitt Romney intends to govern not only in disregard of conservatives, but in contempt of them.

For opposing this, there are those who would label me a traitor should I withhold my vote from Mitt Romney in November. It is at this point that I must say that while all must be free to do as their conscience dictates, I would ask those who wield this label to consider who it is that is committing a treason, and who is being faithful. If one can become convicted of the notion that Mitt Romney’s actions express an ill intention toward conservatism, and if conservatism is the vital life-sustaining philosophy of our great nation, what must be the end result of Mitt Romney’s administration, if he wishes to govern without respect to those principles?

GOP defenders, take your "rah rah team" garbage and shove it where it belongs. Those of us with actual understanding of rights, principles and liberty will go our own way...and we don't give a damn for your opinion. Let your chains set lightly upon you, and let posterity soon forget that you were once called Americans.